MINUTES OF THE MEETING

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON SPECIAL OPERATIONS PROTECTIVE CLOTHING AND EQUIPMENT

SAN DIEGO, CA

14 -- 16 MARCH 2012 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Dean Cox at 08.00 on Wednesday, 14 March 2012. The following members and guests were present:

MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE: Dean Cox, Chairman Fairfax County (VA) Fire & Rescue Karen Lehtonen, Secretary Lion Dave Trebisacci, Staff Liaison NFPA Steve Corrado Underwriters Laboratories Charles Dunn TenCate/Southern Mills Jim Frank CMC Rescue Dan Gohlke WL Gore and Associates Bill Haskell NIOSH Kim Henry PBI Performance Products (by phone) Diane Hess PBI Performance Products Tricia Hock SEI Gavin Horn University of Illinois Fire Service Institute Steve Hudson Pigeon Mountain Industries George Krause Globe Manufacturing Jeremy Metz West Metro Fire Rescue Craig Mignogno Columbus (OH) Firefighters Union James Murray FDNY Robert Nelson Chula Vista Fire Department Jack Reall Columbus (OH) Firefighters Union Doug Stephenson City of Johns Creek Fire Department Beverly Stutts Underwriters Laboratories GUESTS IN ATTENDANCE: Roger Barker NC State (by phone) Shawn Deaton NC State (by phone) Ben Favret Vestagen Claire King Propel LLC Amanda Newsome Underwriters Laboratories Celia Powell Battelle/US Army Mark Saner Workrite Uniform Jeff Stull International Personal Protection (by phone) Rich Young DuPont

Members and guests introduced themselves. The Staff Liaison read the Committee Procedures statement and provided a Staff Liaison report which included a cycle update for the various documents covered by this Technical Committee. The Minutes of the last Committee meeting held in Alexandria, VA 12 -- 13 July 2011 were reviewed.

Motion by Diane Hess, seconded by Bill Haskell To approve the Minutes of the 12 -- 13 July 2011 Alexandria, VA

Motion passed Chairman’s Remarks: Chairman Cox welcomed new member Rob Nelson from Chula Vista Fire Department; he also recognized several manufacturers are still awaiting appointment for balance. Chairman Cox also recognized Jim Murray’s task group and Jim Frank’s task group for getting their respective draft documents together and moving that work forward in the process. It was noted that new SCAM documents are on hold until further input/decisions are made regarding the publication of SCAM documents by Standards Council based on TCC input. This committee will provide our recommendation that SCAM documents being should remain stand-alone documents and not be included in the product documents to TCC Chairman Haskell. Technical Correlating Committee Update: The TCC last met at NFPA headquarters. The TCC spent much of their meeting time reviewing the new NPFA revision process. They also discussed with NFPA staff improvements that can be made within this Fire and Emergency Services project. There was discussion regarding the make-up of the TCC and the ability of committee chairmen to vote at the TCC level. The concept of the merger of the NFPA TC on Emergency Medical Protective Clothing (NFPA 1999) with the Special Operations TC was discussed. Bill Haskell gave a brief description of the recent history of the EMS committee chairmanship and make up. At this time the technical committee needs a new chairman since Bill Haskell cannot serve as the TC Chair and the TCC Chair. Therefore at the last TCC meeting the option of merging these TC’s was discussed. This technical committee then had discussion on a potential merger; any further comments should be submitted to Chairman Haskell and Chairman Cox. The TC attended a breakout training session on the new NFPA document revision process Presentation: A presentation was provided to the TC on requirements for first layers in the military by C. King, Propel LLC and C. Powell, US Army. A copy of the presentation is attached to the minutes. NFPA 1975 First Draft The technical committee reviewed and took action on the Public Input received. The committee also generated First Revisions and Committee Input.

NFPA 1855 Public Comments The technical committee reviewed and took action on the public comments received. No committee comments were generated. Document Update and review of revision cycle calendar NFPA 1951 – NITMAM update, next revision cycle TBD

NFPA annual meeting is the week of June 10th; NITMAM’s will be heard June 13/14. Staff Liaison Trebisacci explained the process to the TC. The next edition of NFPA 1951 is scheduled to be issued by the NFPA Standards Council on August 9, 2012 with an effective date of August 24, 2012 (PDF available August 27).

Contaminated Water PCE NFPA 1953 (SC agenda Aug 2012, requesting F14 cycle)

The TC letter ballot passed and is currently being balloted with TCC. Comments supporting the work on this document should be sent to Standards Council prior to their August meeting.

Rope and Harness SCAM NFPA 1858 (SC agenda Aug 2012, requesting F14 cycle)

A proposed draft was completed by the task group. Progression on the draft is on hold until Standards Council provides direction on how SCAM documents will be processed.

NFPA 1952 – Current edition 2012, next edition 2015 (F14) NFPA 1983 – 2012 edition now available, next edition 2017 (F16)

A task group reviewed the document for errors that were identified upon publication to determine how they can be addressed within the NPFA process (Errata, FI, TIAs, short cycle, etc). A small group will meet prior to FDIC to draft the necessary TIA’s and determine if short cycling the document is the solution.

Old Business: Chairman Cox reaffirmed the TC’s position regarding SCAM documents and will forward the recommendation to TCC Chairman Haskell. New Business: The next meeting will be held January 8-10, 2013. The location is TBD but Key West or southern Florida are the preferred locations. This meeting will be to review the Second Draft of NFPA 1975 and the First Draft of NFPA 1953.

Motion by Jack Reall, second by Jeremy Metz To adjourn

Motion passed Chairman Cox adjourned the meeting at 10:00 on 16 March 2012.

Respectfully submitted,

Karen Lehtonen Karen Lehtonen, Secretary TC on Special Operations Protective Clothing and Equipment

14 March 2012

Military Requirements Relating to

NFPA 1975

UNCLASSIFIED

Overview

Current military requirements

- Flammability

- Comfort/Moisture Management

- Insect Repellency

- Antimicrobial

Concerns with current melt/stick tests

- NFPA 1975 – Oven Test

- NFPA 2112/2113 – No Test

Potential screening test

2

UNCLASSIFIED

Army Requirements Flammability

Inner Layers

- Mounted Soldier

Previously - cotton, wool or aramid

Short term update – ASTM 6413, max 6” char

Longer term – no melt / no drip / no stick

- Dismounted Soldier

No current requirement – issued cotton underwear & polyester thermal base layers

Longer term – combine with Mounted Soldier for no melt / no drip / no stick

- Issue – no quick, simple, inexpensive test for no melt / no drip / no stick

3

UNCLASSIFIED

Army Requirements Flammability

Outer Layers

- Mounted Soldier

All outer layers FR – Duty Uniform & Cold Weather

ASTM D6413 – Max char 4” to 5” depending on item

- Dismounted Soldier

FR Duty Uniforms in Middle East

ASTM D6413 – Max char 4” to 5” depending on item

Developing FR soft shell jacket

- Instrumented manikin requirements

ASTM F1930, 4 second exposure

Updating duty uniform requirement to max 35% predicted 2nd + 3rd degree burn (including head)

4

UNCLASSIFIED

Army Requirements Comfort

Inner layers

- Air Permeability – min 120 to 300 cfm

- Moisture Management – multiple internal tests

Vertical wicking

Horizontal wicking

Water absorption

Duty uniform

- Air Permeability

Min being raised from 10 to 25 cfm for FR ACU

ACS – varies depending on location in garment

Mesh torso – min 240 cfm

Printed sleeves/sides – min 30 cfm

- Moisture Management – mainly internal tests

5 UNCLASSIFIED

Army Requirements Insect Repellency

Inner layers – not used

Duty uniforms

- Required for all woven uniforms, FR & non-FR

MIL-DTL-44411

Analysis for permethrin levels on fabric

Bite protection testing performed by USDA

Requirements stated for unwashed garments & after 20/50 laundering cycles

All treatment currently done on finished garments

- Not currently required for Army Combat Shirt

Multiple fabrics in one garment

Effectiveness concerns give open knit fabric construction

6 UNCLASSIFIED

Army Requirements Antimicrobial

Not widely used

Concerns about

- Skin sensitivity – removed from FREE Layer 1

- Effectiveness on garments worn for long period

Items with current requirement

- USMC FR Combat Ensemble Shirt – log 2 requirement for knitted torso only

- US Army Lightweight Protective Hood – log 1 requirement for lining fabric

7

UNCLASSIFIED

Concerns with Current Melt/Stick Tests

ASTM D6413 – Melt/Drip Observations

- Very subjective – bits of falling char often reported as “flaming melt/drip”

- Molten drips can damage burner

NFPA Thermal Shrinkage/Stability

- Oven test conditions not relevant to short duration threats like IED, flash fire or electric arc

- Even aramid knits do not perform well

- Safety concerns for test operators due to fumes

Natick Textile Material Evaluation & Testing lab will not run the test

- Few 3rd party labs have capability for the test

8 UNCLASSIFIED

Potential Test for Melt/Drip/Stick

Based on ASTM D6413

Cover back of specimen holder with foil

Mount specimen in garment configuration – skin side of fabric toward foil.

9

UNCLASSIFIED

Potential Test for Melt/Drip/Stick

Perform test per ASTM D6413

Remove specimen from test chamber

Slide foil and specimen from holder

10

UNCLASSIFIED

Potential Test for Melt/Drip/Stick

Observe for evidence of melting

Lift corner of specimen to check for sticking

11

UNCLASSIFIED

Potential Test for Melt/Drip/Stick

Potential alternate version – 45o vs Vertical

Need to evaluate with more fabrics

May also be of interest for NFPA 2113

- Specifies “non-melting” underwear

- Does not state how to determine what is “non-melting”

Given advancements in comfort & moisture management in blends, we need to have a realistic screening test to move beyond cotton, wool or aramid for underlayers

12

UNCLASSIFIED

Questions?

UNCLASSIFIED

Celia Suratt Powell

Battelle Contractor / US Army NSRDEC

Warrior Equipment and Systems Division

(508) 233-5802

celia.powell@us.army.mil

13

Photos courtesy of

Thanks to

Clare King

Propel LLC

(401) 751-2216

www.propel-llc.com

NFPA 1975 Group Clare King

San Diego, March 14, 2012

Propel’s Relevant Experience • Currently involvement in several projects related to

fire resistant base layer for Fire Service and US Military.

– “Effect of Base Layers on Physiological and Perceptual Responses to Exercise in Personal Protective Equipment”, Professor Denise Smith (PI), Department of Health and Exercise Sciences, Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs NY. Funded by DHA FEMA FP&S Grant.

– “Wearable Advanced Sensor Platform for Emergency Responder Health and Safety”, Globe Manufacturing LLC, 12 month Contract Award May 23, 2011. Contracting Agency: US Army, National Protection Center, NSRDEC,

– “Fire Resistant Fabrics of the Future”, Sheep Venture Company, 3 Year Contract Award September 26, 2011. Contracting Agency: US Army NSRDEC.

• Sub-contractor support related to performance requirements and testing of textiles

• Developed FR yarns and textiles integrated into fielded US Army items

Soldier and Firefighter - Same Need/Different Operational Modes • Both Soldiers and Firefighters have an operational need

for comfortable, durable, protective fire resistant clothing • Soldiers wear base layers (knits) and Duty Uniform

(woven) – extended time frame (days or even weeks) without

change of clothes • Firefighters wear T shirt (knit) and Station Uniform

(woven) – generally have easy access to change clothing – may change next to skin T shirt 2 to 3 times a shift

•

Non FR vs. Inherently Fire Resistant Base Layer • Firefighter now typically wear a Cotton T Shirt that is

comfortable and very inexpensive - $6 to $10 per shirt – Poor moisture management

• Synthetics have better moisture management, are more expensive and a poor choice for protection from burn injury

• Inherently fire resistant base layers are significantly more expensive @ $35-40 per shirt – Good moisture management – Good protection

• Cost vs. performance for Non FR vs. inherently FR • Testing always adds to cost

Thermal Shrinkage Testing • Next-to-Skin FR base layer fabrics are light weight knit

constructions with good air permeability for comfort and fit. • Current NFPA 1975 standard (7.1) of no more than 10%

shrinkage is consistent with the US Army requirements for woven textiles but is not consistent with that for Next-to-Skin knits.

• US Army’s only Next-to-Skin fabric Thermal Shrinkage requirement is 15%x18% and NOT 10%x10% as in NFPA 1975. (Fire Resistant Environmental Ensemble (FREE).

• Heavier knits with tight constructions may be able to pass 10% shrinkage – but comfort and fit are compromised if used Next-to-Skin

• Not extending Thermal Shrinkage to Next-to-Skin base layers is consistent with US Military approach

TPP testing for Base Layers and Station Uniforms

• Thermal Protective Performance (TPP) testing is already used and well understood by the fire service (NFPA 1971)

• TPP has been adopted by US Military for base layers and the duty uniform

• TPP of 7 for FR ACU • TPP range 6 to 10 for

base layers

Comfort Testing – Air Perm vs. MVTR • Air Permeability (ASTM D737) is a rapid, inexpensive

and useful measure of comfort – Fabrics with higher air perm will provide more comfort and

breathability – Moisture and heat escape with better air perm – US Army and USMC consistently use Air Perm for next to

skin layers (200 to 300 cfm)

• Moisture Vapor Transmission Rate testing (e.g. ASTM E96) of base layers is – Much more costly than Air Perm testing – Generally used as test method for barrier properties e.g

breathable rain gear – Difficult to know where to set the standard

Commercial Challenges for Treating Textiles with Insect Repellant

• Insect Repellant processing can be done on textile roll goods BUT – Few US based processors with EPA certification to

treat roll goods – Resistance by contractors to handling Permethrin

treated roll goods due to health and safety concerns for workers

• US Military uses finished whole garments treatment process, BUT – there are a very limited number of processors

Clare King Propel LLC

189 Governor St Suite 203

Providence RI 02906 cking@propel-llc.com

T: 401 751 2216 C: 401 935 8873

Thanks to Celia Suratt Powell, US Army NSRDEC